Despite a high degree of popularity and widespread use in homes, schools, parks and other public/holiday environments, the use of trampolines has been shown to incur an alarming accident/injury rate. As the overwhelming majority of injuries occur in domestic situations (i.e. non-public, household environments), any improvement in the intrinsic passive safety of the trampoline design would have significant advantages.
The design of conventional trampolines (circular, octagonal, or rectangular) incorporates a peripheral exterior metal frame with an interposed mat tensioned within the plane of the frame by conventional extension springs spaced about the edge of the mat and attached to the frame. This configuration leads to the springs being in the same plane as the bouncing surface of the mat, with the attendant risk that the user will land on the springs (and/or the gaps between springs) instead of the mat. Use of additional protective covers over the upper surface of springs minimises, but does not eliminate, the risk of injury. Moreover, the frame itself provides a non-yielding surface that can also cause injury to the user in the event of a wayward landing. Similar injuries are possible through impacts with the side of trampoline, e.g. inadvertent collisions from children engaged in (and distracted by) other garden activities such as rugby and so forth.
Whilst overcoming or reducing the aforesaid disadvantages is obviously desirable, any effective alternative to conventional trampolines must provide comparable performance in terms of the bouncing characteristics.